Message text written by Clark Evans
>
Sorry to inntterupt your regularly scheduled programming,
but I think that this is important to everyone.
<<<
Sounds like its time for messrs Cottonwood and Co to cut
loose their tackle and get some new line. The judge doesn't
like them and the lawyers have got them in a nasty tangle.
I'd quit while I was behind on that battle and pick a new war
with a battle field of my own choosing. (Agree to pay
over a 99 year period - borrow the money from Nebraska
State and pay them back at a nickel a week! Got to be
cheaper for them than sending you to jail....).
On the broader front - it does show that within the XML/EDI
context it is very important to ensure that the information you
are sending is secure and only available to the party or
parties that you intend.
For instance what may appear to be innocent information
can suddenly become important. Say President Clintons
orders of flowers from 800flowers.com may be of interest
in certain quarters. Clearly the paranoid
would want to disclose a document not on easily copied
and manipulated content. If doing digital data you clearly
want to have the thing encrypted.
If you really want to be safe avoid digital data at all costs.
My favourite is writing things on to a piece of stair bannister
round dowelling with a yellow pen. Its a perfectly legal document.
Humans can read this, but photocopiers, fax machine
and scanners cannot! Don't forget to add 'do not transcribe
or type content into any electronic media' to be really safe.
It also does not fit neatly into cardboard boxes real well, or filing
cabinets.
The final solution is possibly a little extreme - create a new
country - and then export all lawyers there. The Brit's tried
this with Australia, but somehow something went awry
somewhere along the line.
DW.